Disposed

Mayank Arora v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2024A482/23480/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act. The court notes counsel's reliance on Aneeta Hada regarding partnership liability. Notice is issued to opposite party no. 2, and coercive steps are stayed.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to opposite party no. 2; coercive steps stayed; matter listed for further hearing.

Mayank Arora vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

(SN.42)

¶3

Court No. - 79

¶4

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23480 of 2024

¶5

Applicant :- Mayank Arora Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Maheshwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Vivek Kumar Maheshwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Jitendra Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case N. 4710 of 2023 (Sohanpal Singh Vs. Mayank Arora) under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 police station Crossing Republic, Ghaziabad pending before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad as well as the summoning order dated 21.3.2024.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the cheque in question was issued by New Star Hospital, which is a partnership firm which is apparent from perusal of the cheque itself where the signatory has signed as a partner of the firm. In view thereof, in terms of Section 141 of the N.I. Act the said firm is required to be made as a party in the complaint filed under section 138 of the N.I. Act. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgement in the case of Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels & Tours (P) Ltd., : (2012) 5 SCC 661.

¶10

In view thereof, the matter requires consideration.

¶11

Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2

¶12

Opposite party no. 1 is represented by the learned A.G.A.

¶13

Both the opposite parties may file the counter affidavit within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

¶14

List this matter on 6.12.2024 in the additional cause list.

¶15

Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of Complaint Case N. 4710 of 2023 (Sohanpal Singh Vs. Mayank Arora) under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 police station Crossing Republic, Ghaziabad pending before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad as well as the summoning order dated 21.3.2024.

¶16

Order Date :- 24.9.2024 o.k.

¶17

(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- OM KRISHNA CHOUDHARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mayank Arora v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayank Arora v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sonu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Sushil vs State of Up and 03 Others

Chandrapal vs State of Up and 3 Others

Sudarshan Yadav vs State of Up and 12 Others

Agya Ram vs State of Up and 3 Others

Meena Kumari vs State of U.P. and 2 Others